Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 160 posts

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#151

Post by P5fRxh5kUvp2th »

zamadatix wrote: post #136
HDThoreaun wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% stopping kids in voice chat isn't the goal. Stopping kids from accidentality joining voice chat is. So nothing is stopping them from purposefully getting a chat activated account, that's the point.

The law itself disagrees. It's quite explicit that the point is to not allow kids into chat rooms at all without parental consent. It does not mention anything about preventing kids from accidentally joining chat just that they are not the ones able to provide consent to allow chat.

Is your argument that the law specifically has language interpreting its goal?

Can you quote it please, because I find that surprising.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#152

Post by P5fRxh5kUvp2th »

bioemerl wrote: post #149
wilg wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loot boxes are generally not considered gambling because you don't wager anything and don't win money. They are very much like a kids version of gambling though!

I would say that anything using skinner's box style methods to encourage people to repeat an action, and when there is money involved in that process at all, for example if you can buy the results of the loot boxes or you can buy the loot boxes themselves, it's gambling. Epic allowed you to purchase loot boxes and get a random chance to get the thing you wanted as a result. If it's something you can't pay for and it'…

It's about the legal definition of gambling rather than the human understanding of it.

It's slimy, but per the legal definition, it isn't gambling.

Should it be illegal? personally, I think if it's targetted at children then yes.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#153

Post by larksimian »

robswc wrote: post #134
dagmx wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because a lot of engineers get hung up in the “oh there’s so many ways to defeat this” mindset, and forget that perfect is the enemy of good. Sensible defaults are a good enough start and many regulations like this are based around best efforts , not absolute perfection.

It seems so pointless though. I was signing up for all sorts of things when I was a kid. Nothing bad by any stretch of the imagination but I knew when they asked "are you 13" you just click "yes" and you're good to go. Seems like a "feel good" solution that will collectively waste thousands of hours. I don't see why this is required, quite honestly.

There's also the fact that the kid who is enough of a dope(/trusting/rule and authority abiding) to not know he can lie on the form is also the most likely to be victimized by adults online.

This is a similar selection effect to misspelled Nigerian prince emails, so I'd say it's a pretty good mechanism actually.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#154

Post by PurpleRamen »

robswc wrote: post #137
PurpleRamen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter whether some will circumvent the age-gate. The company made an attempt, and enough kids are blocked by it, this is a good enough for the law, at the moment. But Epic is not willing to even walk this short way...

What is the point then? It would be like a bar tender asking if you're 21 and letting you drink if you just reply "yes." Regulators would be happy though because "at least you tried?" I get its just trying to shift the burden onto the parents and the "lying child" but at the end of the day it just seems like it would collectively waste so many hours.

The point is that it's better than no having no solution. Not every kid is lying, not every kid is on its own. That we need a better solution, does not invalidate usage of the existing in the meantime.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#155

Post by robswc »

PurpleRamen wrote: post #154
robswc wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point then? It would be like a bar tender asking if you're 21 and letting you drink if you just reply "yes." Regulators would be happy though because "at least you tried?" I get its just trying to shift the burden onto the parents and the "lying child" but at the end of the day it just seems like it would collectively waste so many hours.

The point is that it's better than no having no solution. Not every kid is lying, not every kid is on its own. That we need a better solution, does not invalidate usage of the existing in the meantime.

>The point is that it's better than no having no solution

IMO, I just feel like it wastes too much time to justify itself. Hundreds of thousands of hours spent on a solution that relies entirely on the (unreliable) respondent.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#157

Post by jasmer »

robswc wrote: post #141
jasmer wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$520M is a pinch, I can assure you it will change their behaviour in some ways. I worked at a company where this happened, the legal polices that came afterwards were actually prohibitive. We couldn't shit without a lawyer. CEOs have bosses and they don't like to lose money like this - it's a 'headline' loss as well, making it feel worse. What remains to be seen is the nature of the change because so often it's just…

They may have already made the changes. I started playing again and I've found they're pretty damn fair with pricing. You can "earn" the currency to buy the skins. I never really buy much though but at least it feels fair. I also never got "confused" about purchasing things but this is 2022 UI/UX.

It has to be 'fair and obvious' to the reptilian brain.

We are all busy. We don't have time to learn where all the buttons are, what leads to what.

I see my elderly parents confused and bewildered.

Now I see myself bewildered on new apps that I just don't care to bother to learn.

Even Skype - the UI changes so often, every time I use it, I don't know WTF is going on. I can't find how to make the call, put on hold.

On my iPhone if I get a call while a call is incoming, I'm immediately pressed to 'MAKE A DECISION NOW!' with a bewildering array of choices while an alarm and buzzer says 'HURRY!'.

When am I supposed to learn how all of that works? By 'practising' incoming calls?

Technology is exploding, it's becoming too much for all of us - trust me there will come a time where you 'do not give a nut' about learning the UX for the next new thing, and then you're in trouble.

Given this I think we need to rethink UI a bit or stick to first principles.

And anything that involves privacy or money has to stick to those principles.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#158

Post by jasmer »

robswc wrote: post #140
jasmer wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It's extremely intrusive to have some random fool listening in on my own household, when I may be unaware. People have no idea how technology works, even smart people. Default mic/camera etc. off - they can provided a nice little popup and have us turn it on. Because companies will always push boundaries and cross the line, we need legislation unfortunately and can only hope the legislators don't fuck it up.

This I can get behind... but I do always go to the options and turn on "push to talk." I don't like the idea of legislation requiring such a thing though.

We need legislation because PM's pushed to profit by CEO's just cross the line far too often. It's hard to explain but when you see it, you understand. It's the game we create. We don't even need to point the finger, because usually it's not 'someone's fault' is just stuff that happens. Many of these decisions are made even without deliberation.

It'd be nice to have 'best practices' oversight instead of lawyers but we're not that sophisticated yet.

And we don't really have a way of contemplating 'scale' aka once companies reach a certain size, their impact is greater and we have to be more careful.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#159

Post by xboxnolifes »

Gareth321 wrote: post #4

I'm fine with Epic getting financially reprimanded for dark patterns and anti-consumer behaviour. I am not on board with this: > That lawsuit also accused the company of illegally enabling real-time voice and text chat communications for children and teens in the game by default. So voice chat must now be turned off by default for all children across America? How on earth is this supposed to be policed? Should everyo…

Seems easy to comply by just applying it to everyone.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#160

Post by jacooper »

p_j_w wrote: post #114
jacooper wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They issued refunds for this, why didn't you request one? It also runs perfectly fine with proton.

If memory serves, plenty of people were denied refunds.

Interesting, didn't follow on that so I don't know.

I just switched to using proton and everything worked fine.

Post reply on HN